I think that this idea was "inspired" from Star Trek Generations myself. Gothymog 18:52, 9 Nov 2005 (UTC)

  • Considering Generations premiered November 18, 1994 and the mass-market edition of Jedi Search was released February 1, 1994, I'd say that'd be impossible, it may even be the other way around.--Eion 19:04, 9 Nov 2005 (UTC)

"Alternate" Sun Crusher Edit

Anyone willing to scan in the 'alternate' design of the Sun Crusher from the cover one of the Jedi Trilogy? I think it's Dark Apprentice... Thanos6 20:13, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)

  • "Alternate" design? Hmm, interesting. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:43, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • Yeah, it retains the crystalline look but otherwise has an entirely different layout. Personally, I think it looks better than the "canon" design, and should be included in a 'Behind the scenes' note. Thanos6 20:50, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • I uploaded the picture. It's at It was on the Dark Apprentice cover. Feel free to do whatever you want with it. Xwing328 21:22, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • Thank you. Admiral J. Nebulax 21:24, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)
      • Thanks. Told you it was cooler. :) Thanos6 22:53, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)
    • I always assumed that that was a transport ship. Oh well, shows what I know. -- SFH 01:22, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)
      • I thought the same thing. Admiral J. Nebulax 20:39, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)
        • Are we sure that isn't a resonance torpedo or something? The torpedos were equally hard to beat down, and I'm sure they looked snazzier than the average torpedo, what with the ludicrous cost and all. -LightWarden 02:04, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
          • Well, Thanos6, where did you get that information? Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 21:41, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
            • Didn't get it from anywhere. Just like you assumed it was a transport ship, I assumed it was the Sun Crusher (crystalline, with a special launcher for resonance torpedoes). Thanos6 01:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
              • Well, since you assumed, couldn't it be another ship design altogether? Fleet Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 21:22, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
                • By the same logic everyone else is assuming that it is another ship type and just assuming it's not the sun crusher. I think some mention needs to be made of it as a possible alternative but not a definitive one. --Tethran 11:57, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Most powerful superweaponEdit

The Sun Crusher is nothing. The Superweapon in "Still Active After All These Years" almsot destroyed the entire GFFA, save for the efforts of Kiro!JustinGann 11:24, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Okay, are you saying that the Sun Crusher is or isn't a powerful superweapon? Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 13:27, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
    • It's powerful, but to whoever said it's the most powerful, Centerpoint Station would like to have a word with you. It's demonstrably just as powerful (both can blow up stars), and can also do a variety of other things, such as producing artificial gravity wells anywhere its controllers choose (theoretically even spanning the entire galaxy). 16:11, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
      • Well, I guess every superweapon has their strong point. Admiral J. Nebulax (talk) 20:47, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
        • I'm saying the ability to destroy ONE solar system is diddly in light of destroying them ALL.JustinGann 05:31, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Centerpoint Station and the Starforge were more technologically advanced the Death Star and other Imperial technologies. --Nichtganz 16:04, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

The Alternate Picture Edit

That came from the book cover of one of the Jedi Academy novels. It looks like a Z-95 Headhunter to me. I don't think it was meant to be the sun crusher, but Mara Jade's Headhunter.

Erasing lives sentence Edit

  • Currently the article has this sentence: The Sun Crusher could obliterate an entire system, erasing trillions of sentient lives in a few hours. in the Specs section. That depends on how populated the system is. What about replacng 'trillions of' with 'many' or 'all'? -Fnlayson 21:44, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • I feel it's hard to convey a sense of magnitude with "many" or "numerous" so I think billions will work. The Earth only supports some 6 billion people, and I'd say that for a star system that might have at most 2-3 inhabited worlds, it won't multiply that number 200-fold to reach a trillion. Also, there's that one short story from Tales from the New Republic where the main character yells "You killed billions!" to Kyp it's probably not a bad estimate. -lalala_la
    • "The Sun Crusher could obliterate an entire system.." conveys huge destruction already. -Fnlayson 16:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Palpy's knowledgeEdit

"Unknown even to Emperor Palpatine"
―The article

Ramming Star Destroyers Edit

Wouldn't it be funny if the Sun Crusher tried to ram a Star Destroyer....and got itself stuck in its hull? It's like shooting a bullet through a wood block. The bullet will remain intact of course, but there's nothing to guarantee it'll come out the other side. Not to mention that I can't imagine this being very comfortable for the passengers - lalala_la

Lasor cannons Edit

The schematics and cutaway view show 5 laser turrets. One on top and four arounf the "rim". Are those not sufficient sources coming from the The Essential Guide to Weapons and Technology? -Fnlayson 15:46, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Slight error?Edit

In the article it currently states "The Sun Crusher was then placed deep inside the poisonous atmosphere of the gas giant Yavin, where it was thought that the incredible atmospheric pressures would destroy the craft." However, on page 154 of Dark Apprentice it states that the plan was for it to "be burried forever" and on 155 that the plan was to "bury it in the clouds and the high-pressure core below" - neither of these suggest the plan was to destroy it but to place it out of the reach of anyone else as no other ship would be able to withstand the journey. Perhaps a better way of phrasing it within the article would be "where it was thought that the incredible atmospheric pressures would render the craft inaccessable" or something to that effect? -- 15:08, 4 June 2007 (UTC)


Could someone please source me what page, chapter, or even which of the books in the trilogy has it written that Palpitine had no knowledge of the Maw Facility? Logic would seem to dictate that he would have some knowledge of it ("Where was that Death Star developed? I hadn't heard anything about it before..." "Oh... Well... You know, around?" Doesn't quite seem to cut it.) --Tethran 15:59, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

  • The Death Star wasn't constructed at the Maw Installation. And I'm positive that it specifically says in either Jedi Search or Dark Apprentice that Palpatine didn't know of the Maw Installation. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 19:07, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
It was developed there though - they had a prototype of it and all if I remember correctly. --Tethran 22:18, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
That seems very, very retarded. I'm gonna be away for a few days so I'll take a few books with me and see if I can find specific references. --Tethran 00:45, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Okay, having dug out the Star Wars Encyclopaedia (which is a little out of date I admit but does tend to provide sources) I will concede that the Emperor had no formal knowledge of the Maw Installation (kept secret even from the Emperor), however, it does state that the Maw installation was where the Death Star was developed and where the first prototype was built. I'll see if I can find the reference in the Jedi Academy Trilogy over the next few days. If/When I do I'll post the page ref for anyone else that's interested in the source of the Emperor not knowing. --Tethran 01:00, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
And maybe I found it quicker than I thought I would. The reference is on p245 of Jedi Search, 1995 Bantam Books reprint. "Since Tarkin took credit for everything without citing his sources, the Emperor himself did not known of the installation's existence." On p246 is the sentance showing that the Death Star I was first developed at the Maw Installation "After Tol Sivron and his teams proved the initial concept of the Death Star" --Tethran 01:05, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
  • "That seems very, very retarded". It's canon. The first Death Star began construction during the events of Revenge of the Sith. Following that, a Death Star prototype was constructed in the Maw as a testbed for correcting the Death Star I's superlaser. —Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 11:06, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
    • Was there a reason why they decided to make this change? Or is it just one of those because-Lucas-said-so things? I mean they borrowed Coruscant from the EU and wove it into the PT, so they could've done it for this instance as well Lalala la 06:57, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

IP comment Edit

Moved this from the article:

EDIT: The person who wrote that article failed to clarify that it was also fast enough to get out of the range of danger after shooting the sun, leaving it open to speculate by those unfamiliar with the ship that it might be a suicide mission type vessel. The Sun Crusher is small, fast, nicely armored, and powerful. If I recall correctly, the speed was a part in why Kyp Durron had to be stopped by other means than capture. Unsigned comment by (talk • contribs).

The armored part is already covered in the article. -Fnlayson 13:20, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Size? Edit

Wait a minute, I thought the Sun Crusher was bigger. How big is it? -CloneSaber(Droid's Hangout) 23:14, 7 June 2008 (UTC)